釋門歸敬儀 2.20

2.20

Third, explaining spreading the niṣīdana, and fourth, explaining removing the leather shoes: In central India extreme reverence is observed; in the rites of audience for the ministers in this land, all take place in the palace courtyard, so shoes are not removed. Sometimes when ascending the palace hall, both sword and shoes are discarded; this is the ancient rule. In the land of India, the ground is mostly humid and hot; shoes are made of leather and ordained to be worn, but if one sees a superior and venerated person, one is ordered to remove them. In other cold countries, one wears them as appropriate. When performing rites, after one has bare feet, can one tread upon the bare earth? It should be upon a niṣīdana. Searching through the sūtras and Vinaya, there is no text mentioning spreading the niṣīdana; they only say, "Removing shoes and bowing at the feet." Now, based on practical use, in principle a niṣīdana is required; therefore, the origin of establishing the niṣīdana states: "For the sake of the body, for the sake of clothing, and for the sake of the Saṅgha's bedding." Since it is for the body and clothing, we clearly know it was laid out beforehand. Furthermore, the name "sitting cloth" (niṣīdana) was originally an implement for when sitting; therefore, in bowing and veneration, there is no text on spreading it. Thus, when the Tathāgata was about to sit, as usual he spread it himself. According to this, a monk spreads it himself and sits; it is improper for others to spread it for him. Now we see that when Indian monks come before the Buddha to bow, they must first tuck up their robes, touch their knees to the ground, join their palms, kneel upright, praise the Buddha orally, and then bow their heads. This legacy still remains and can be taken as a model; that there was no niṣīdana is clear. Recently, when some perform reverence before the Buddha or the Saṅgha, they still order their attendants to spread the niṣīdana for them. This is acting out of arrogance and is not yet the offering of respect. There are also those who must wait for a mat to be laid before they begin to bow; this is also improper. If one sees a venerated elder, one must immediately bow down; how could one wait to look for a mat? Evaluating the matter, one should offer rites according to the moment and cannot wait for a mat: if there is one, accord with the mat; if not, accord with the ground, and that will do. As in the ancestral temple, the palace courtyard, or official yamens, where would a mat be set out? Using this as a comparison, reverence and negligence are clearly divided.